On 05/09/2012 03:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I see no memory leak at all in this example, either in HEAD or 9.1 > branch tip. Perhaps whatever you're seeing is an already-fixed bug? > > Another likely theory is that you've changed settings from the 8.1 > installation. I would expect this example to eat about 10 times > work_mem (due to one tuplestore for each generate_series invocation), > and that's more or less what I see happening here. A large work_mem > could look like a leak, but it isn't.
Good call -- of course that just means my contrived example fails to duplicate the real issue :-( In the real example, even with work_mem = 1 MB I see the same behavior on 9.1. > If you need further help in debugging, try launching the postmaster > under a fairly restrictive memory ulimit, so that the backend will get a > malloc failure before it starts to swap too badly. The memory map it > will then print on stderr should point to where the memory is going. Thanks -- will try that. Joe -- Joe Conway credativ LLC: http://www.credativ.us Linux, PostgreSQL, and general Open Source Training, Service, Consulting, & 24x7 Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers